THE INTELLECTUALISATION OF AFRICAN LANGUAGES: THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF LIMPOPO
By
Alydia Modjadji Letsoalo
THESIS
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In
TRANSLATION STUDIES In the
FACULTY OF HUMANITIES
(School of Languages and Communication studies) At the
UNIVERSITY OF LIMPOPO
SUPERVISOR: Prof. S.J. Kubayi CO - SUPERVISOR: Prof. R.N. Madadzhe
2020
i CONTENTS
DECLARATION vi
DEDICATION vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS viii
ABSTRACT x
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY 1
1.2.1 Definition of intellectualisation 2
1.2.2 Intellectualisation of African languages in higher education 3
1.2.3 African languages 6
1.2.4 The creation of multilingualism 8
1.2.5 The University of Limpopo’s sociolinguistic profile 12
1.2.6 Language planning 16
1.2.7 Mother tongue education and the medium of instruction 26 1.2.8 Counter-arguments for mother tongue education 31 1.2.9 Parents’ influence on the language of instruction 33
1.2.10 The power of languages 34
1.2.11 Advantages of multilingualism 37
1.3 STATEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROBLEM 38
1.4 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 39
1.4.1 Aim of the study 39
ii
1.4.2 Objectives 39
1.5 QUALITY CRITERIA 39
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 40
1.7 SUMMARY 40
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION 41
2.2 THE DEFINITION OF LANGUAGE POLICY 41
2.3 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA 42
2.4 THE NATIONAL LANGUAGE POLICY FRAMEWORK 42
2.5 LANGUAGE POLICIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING IN
SOUTH AFRICA 43
2.5.1 University of KwaZulu-Natal language policy (UKZN-LP) 44 2.5.2 University of Cape Town language policy (UCT-LP) 47
2.5.3 Rhodes University language Policy (RULP) 48
2.5.4 University of South Africa language policy (UNISA-LP) 50 2.6 LANGUAGE POLICIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING
IN AFRICA 58
2.6.1 Language policy in educational institutions in Zimbabwe 58 2.6.2 Language policy in educational institutions in Tanzania 62 2.6.3 Language policy in educational institutions in Kenya 65 2.6.4 Language policy in educational institutions in Ethiopia 69 2.6.5 Language policy in educational institutions in Ghana 73
iii
2.6.6 Language policy in educational institutions in Mozambique 77 2.6.7 Language policy in educational institutions in Philippines 78 2.6.8 Language policy in educational institutions in Australia 78 2.6.8 Language policy in educational institutions in Europe 79
2.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 80
2.8 SUMMARY 83
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION 84
3.2 THE RESEARCH APPROACH 84
3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN 86
3.4 POPULATION AND SAMPLING 87
3.4.1 Population 87
3.4.2 Sampling 88
3.4.3 Sampling strategy and technique 90
3.5 DATA COLLECTION 90
3.5.1 Types of data 90
3.5.2 Data collection methods 92
3.6 DATA ANALYSIS 93
3.7 QUALITY CRITERIA 95
3.8 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 97
3.9 SUMMARY 98
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
iv
4.1 INTRODUCTION 100
4.2 THE EXISTENCE OF THE LANGUAGE POLICY 103
4.3 PARITY AND EQUITABLE USE OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LIMPOPO 104
4.4 USING OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AS LANGUAGES OF TEACHING AND LEARNING, RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION, AND ACADEMIC PROGRAMMES AT THE UNIVERSITY 108
4.4.1 The need for translation of reading materials in African languages 108
4.4.2 From translation to the development of African languages 112
4.4.3 Adaptation of African language 116
4.5 THE DOMINATION OF ENGLISH IN THE TEACHING OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMMES, AND RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LIMPOPO 118
4.5.1 The domination of English in teaching and learning 118
4.5.2 The domination of English in research and publication 120
4.6 THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNIVERSITY’S LANGUAGE POLICY 122
4.7 ENGLISH, AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND SCIENTIFIC CONTEXT 126
4.8 AFRICAN LANGUAGES AS SCIENTIFIC LANGUAGES 129
4.8.1 Arguments in favour of African languages as scientific languages 129
4.8.2 Arguments against African languages as scientific languages 130
4.9 THE CAPACITY OF AFRICAN LANGUAGES TO EXPRESS IDEAS 131
4.10 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SEPEDI, TSHIVENDA AND XITSONGA THROUGH VOCABULARY EXPANSION AND SENTENCE CONSTRUCTION 134
4.10.1 Vocabulary expansion 134
4.10.2 Syntax (Sentence construction) 137
4.11 THE SOCIO-CULTURAL IMPLICATIONS OF MOTHER TONGUE EDUCATION 139
4.12 THE CHALLENGES OF USING AFRICAN LANGUAGES AS MEDIA OF INSTRUCTION AT THE UNIVERSITY 141
4.13 SUMMARY 144 CHAPTER FIVE
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
v
5.1 INTRODUCTION 146
5.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 146
5.3 CONCLUSION 153
5.4 RECOMMENDATIONS 154
5.4.1 Recommendations to the University of Limpopo 154
5.4.2 Future studies by other researchers 157
5.5 SUMMARY 157
REFERENCES 159
ANNEXURE A: INTERVIEW GUIDE 182
ANNEXURE B: INFORMANT CONSENT FORM 185
ANNEXURE C: RESEARCH PROPOSAL APPROVAL LETTER 186
ANNEXURE D: ETHICAL CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE 187
vi
DECLARATION
I declare that the thesis hereby submitted to the University of Limpopo, for the degree of Translations Studies and in the field of Linguistics has not previously been submitted by me for a degree at this or any other university; that it is my work in design and in execution, and that all material contained herein has been duly acknowledged.
___________________ ____________
Letsoalo, A.M. (Ms) Date
vii DEDICATION
To my late father, Solomon Mashikashike Letsoalo, and my whole family.
viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to thank God for giving me the strength, wisdom and courage to continue my studies even at a time when I was hopeless.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors, Professor S.J. Kubayi and Professor R.N. Madadzhe, for believing in me. Their guidance, wisdom, fatherly love and selflessness were a source of inspiration. I would not have gotten this far without them.
Thanks are also due to the father of my children, my fiancé Musa Samuel Mitileni, for being my idea box, my editor, my typist, my shoulder to cry on and my therapist. Thank you for always encouraging me not to give up when things were difficult in my life. Not forgetting my bundles of joy, my kids, Itumeleng Shila Salome Letsoalo and Onthatile Khomotšo Sarah Letsoalo, for putting smiles on my face even when I could not afford to smile and for giving me a reason to hold on to my dream and keep going. Without them, this study would not have been successful… I love you.
In addition, my thanks go to my mother Salome Mahlashila Letsoalo, my brothers Simon Makhudu Nkoele Letsoalo and Lieschious Sejagobe Lefofe Letsoalo as well as my sisters Makgoahla Dorcus Mashiane and my twin sister Meriam Molatelo MMereki for their unwavering support and love. I would like to say thank you to you all and I love you!
Again, I would to thank my mother’s colleagues, Mmane Mavis, Jane and others, for their help every time I needed it and for never getting tired of me. I truly appreciate your assistance.
My gratitude goes to my nieces and nephews, Leeto, Bohlale, Lesego, Napiadi, Relebogile, Pono, Onalerona, Neo and Solomon, for their little smiles which gave me a reason to hold on to life. Undoubtedly, you are my little angels and I love you!
Lastly, the financial assistance of the National Institute for the Humanities and Social Sciences, in collaboration with the South African Humanities Deans Association
ix
towards this research is hereby acknowledged. Opinions expressed and conclusions arrived at are those of the author and are not necessarily to be attributed to the NIHSS and SAHUDA.
x ABSTRACT
Some research has been done on the intellectualisation of African languages.
However, African languages are still not used enough in academia; in fact, they are undermined. They need to be developed into languages of education, economy and social interaction. This means preparing the languages for use in more advanced contexts. The aim of this study was to examine the intellectualisation of African languages at the University of Limpopo. Methodologically, this study was achieved through a qualitative-descriptive research design, with the use of semi-structured interviews to find out if the University of Limpopo was actively involved in intellectualising African languages. The data collected was analysed through thematic content analysis.
The first finding is that the University of Limpopo has a language policy whose implementation requires improvement. It was found that there is no parity or equitable use of the languages of the university, mostly between African languages and English.
It has been observed that African languages can improve the academic performance of students at the University of Limpopo. The study further found that the development of African languages can help students and lecturers to learn these languages, so they can communicate with each other in these languages and thereby promote multilingualism. It has been found that the University of Limpopo is a good place to promote and exercise multilingualism as it is a multicultural community. The significant point here is that there is a need to devise strategies to improve the implementation of the university’s language policy. It is concluded that the intellectualisation of African languages would help minimise (if not erase) any language barriers, particularly for those who would be working with individuals on a daily basis in their respective fields.
There is a need to do campaigns to educate students about the importance of mother tongue and African languages as well as to remove the negative perceptions about these languages.
One recommendation for the university is that the University of Limpopo must come up with an implementation plan to implement its language policy. One recommendation for other researchers is to come up with more strategies on how
xi
higher institutions of learning can implement their language policies and intellectualise African languages.
Key words: African languages, higher education, implementation, intellectualisation, language policy, Sepedi, Tshivenda, University of Limpopo, Xitsonga.
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
There appears to be more research works on the intellectualisation of African languages than there are African languages that have been intellectualised (Bamgbose, 2011). This means that African languages are not used enough in academia. Kaschula and Maseko (2014:10) are of the view that the necessity for the intellectualisation of African languages falls directly within the paradigm of implementation. This study focuses on whether or not, in terms of the language policy of the University of Limpopo, African languages are being adequately used as languages of intellectual discourse. It must be acknowledged that there can be no successful implementation of a language policy without a firm policy in place (Kaschula and Maseko, 2014:10). This research hopes to identify, and find solutions, for the problems that prevent the implementation of the University of Limpopo’s language policy, and therefore, the intellectualisation of African languages mentioned in the policy document. It is helpful to find out how African languages are used within the context of the University of Limpopo, and why they are not being developed adequately to fulfil the provisions of the Constitution (1996) and of the university itself as languages of education.
This chapter discusses the background to the study. Furthermore, the chapter presents the statement of the research problem and purpose of the study, which includes the aim and objectives of the study. In addition, the chapter looks at the trustworthiness and credibility of the study and its significance. Lastly, it presents the summary of the study.
1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
In discussing the background to the study on the intellectualisation of African languages at the University of Limpopo, a number of issues become important, and therefore worthy of separate discussion. These include definitions of
2
intellectualisation, a discussion of what African languages are, and the creation of multilingualism. The section will also focus on language issues, such as the University of Limpopo’s sociolinguistic profile, mother tongue education and medium of instruction, as well as parent’s influence on language of instructions. It also looks at the importance of language and language development, the power of English as an international language and the protection and maintenance of linguistic diversity.
1.2.1 Definition of intellectualisation
Quinn, Anderson and Finkelstein (1996:72) argue that intellect resides in the brains of professionals. That is, not everyone is an intellectual. Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998:245) use the term "intellectual capital" to refer to the knowledge and knowing capability of social collectivists such as organizations, intellectual communities, or professional practices. In terms of this view, intellectual capital represents a valuable resource and a capability for action based on knowledge and knowing (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998:245). All people are intellectuals, one could therefore say: but not all people have in society the function of intellectuals (Gramsci, 2005:51). Quinn, Anderson and Finkelstein (1996:72) argue that the value of intellect increases markedly as one moves up the intellectual scale from cognitive knowledge to self- motivated creativity. Gramsci (2005:51) continues to argue:
When one distinguishes between intellectuals and non-intellectuals, one is referring in reality only to the immediate social function of the professional category of the intellectuals, that is, one has in mind the direction in which their specific professional activity is weighted, whether towards intellectual elaboration or towards muscular-nervous effort.
Kaschula and Maseko (2014:10) hold that the term ‘intellectualisation’ could be considered a controversial topic when it comes to African languages. This term, in terms of this view, is provocative and debatable, especially in language and language development. It is thought-provoking and controversial mostly in language and language development because it speaks about the process, movement and development of languages, of which language is a sensitive issue – one that most people have opinions about. The intellectualisation of a language involves the
3
development of new linguistic resources for discussing and disseminating conceptual materials at high levels of abstraction (Bryant & Liddicoat, 2002: [sa]). Gonzalez (2002:5) claims that intellectualisation is examined as a process and product according to its dimensions. Kaschula and Maseko (2014:12) define it as follows:
“Intellectualisation is then a developing concept which requires further definition and refinement on an on-going basis. It is arguably about the process of language policy implementation. In other words, the development of terminologies using whatever means we have at our disposal.”
1.2.2 Intellectualisation of African languages in higher education
Sibayan (1999: 229) in Alexander (2007:30) holds that “an intellectualised language is one which can be used for educating a person in any field of knowledge from preschool to university and beyond”. Magagane (2011:37) emphasises that intellectualisation is the mechanism by which people use reason as the basis of belief and knowledge. Bamgbose (2011) also notes that the intellectualisation of languages relates to efforts made to empower the languages by enhancing their status and extending their use to wider domains.
Cruz and Llamzon cited in Alexander (2003:38) argue that intellectualisation can be understood as the adaptation of a language linking it
… to the goal of making possible precise and rigorous, if necessary, abstract statements; in other words, a tendency towards increasingly more definite yet abstract expression. This tendency affects primarily the lexical, and in part the grammatical, structure.
Clearly, the intellectualisation of languages is about making languages tools of social, economic and educational advancement. This means preparing the languages for use in more advanced contexts, such as higher education, politics, technology, science, religion and economy. The intellectualisation of languages is to use the languages to empower people and to improve their social, economic and educational standing.
Finlayson and Madiba (2002) contend that the intellectualisation of African languages
4
should be seen within the context of national, cultural and economic development initiatives. In this sense, the intellectualisation of African languages aims to develop them in all and mostly higher and wider domains (Finlayson and Madiba, 2002;
Bamgbose, 2011). It therefore becomes important to look at what African languages are.
Alexander (2003:29) points out that in the same way that English and Afrikaans are used as formal academic languages at higher education institutions, every official language of South Africa should be developed towards that position. However, Lafon (2008:37) argues that in South Africa, the use of African languages in education has a long history, but its association with apartheid Bantu Education (BE) from the 1950s has triggered its rejection by the very people for whom it would appear to be pedagogically beneficial. Nevertheless, using African languages in higher education is of vital importance, as Alexander (2007:34-35) explains:
We have to persuade our communities about the potential of African languages as languages of power and languages of high status. It is our task as language activists and professionals, and of the political, educational and cultural leadership to do this....
After fighting for the use of African languages in education, African language speakers are now rejecting their languages (or the languages) in education. African languages at the tertiary level will help African students to see that their languages (African languages) are valuable and that they can be used effectively in education and that they can be improved and promoted like any other language. Alexander (2003:30) further notes that all universities should consider granting relevant candidates the opportunity to translate a key text, or part thereof, into a relevant African language, with or without professional assistance.
Lafon (2008:35) states that beyond education proper, it might help to create the condition for a measure of interaction between schools and learners across racial and social boundaries, and lead to a more integrated society. This can be one of the efforts to make African students sensitive to their mother tongue. It is a way of creating a love of one’s own language. Such efforts can grow and expand to other areas of education.
5
Making African languages open for every student (with no limitations) is also a good way to promote multilingualism in the institution and its hinterland. Nkwashu, Madadzhe and Kubayi (2015:14) argue that like other South African indigenous languages such as Sepedi and Tshivenda, Xitsonga has undergone processes of standardisation and development to the extent that it is able to carry academic register at both primary and secondary school levels. Indigenous languages need to be continually intellectualised to carry the academic register and to be the LoLT in modules other than the language itself.
Biggs (1990) is of the view that it is likely that any effect of medium of instruction on approach to learning is mediated by the language background of the students. With proper language planning and promotion of the languages, the languages will gain stability and respect. If everything is planned accordingly, then everything will fall into place. In this country, it is usually not a problem to formulate policies, but there is often a problem with implementation strategies. Biggs (1990) opines that the argument that language as a medium of instruction (LMI) in L2 affects approach to learning is contingent on the fact that L2 has to be used by the student at a high cognitive level.
Speaking at the SANTED Terminology Development Workshop held on 11-12 May 2009 at Rhodes University, Professor Fred Hendricks, the dean of humanities at Rhodes, gave a brief history of African languages in the South African context and went on to emphasise that “for African languages to develop ‘we need a fundamental change of attitude’ so that all can see the benefit of African languages, especially in education” (Maseko, 2010:7). If South African people and communities can drop their negative attitudes and believe in their African languages and come together to develop and promote African languages to languages of high status, this will lead to a positive multilingual society and country, as well as a great platform in education. Parents should not only be proud of their children’s knowledge of English but should be more proud about their knowledge of their mother tongue and/or first language.
6
Lafon (2008:37) holds the view that prior to BE (Bantu Education), the use of African languages in education and in the written domain at large had reached a level which was promising and almost unrivalled on the continent. African languages should not only be ahead in paper or written form; they should continue being developed to the highest level in order for them to be active and practical in education. Africans, language practitioners and activists should not relax once their languages (African languages) reach the mark; they should work harder to keep them there and beyond.
The intellectualisation of African languages requires their development in education for them to be used as a medium of instruction and/or language of learning and teaching (LOLT). This is the starting point of the whole process of improving and equalising all the official languages in education.Nkwashu, Madadzhe and Kubayi (2015:14) assert the following:
It cannot be denied that African languages are already scientific languages, albeit far from the development status of English; they have already been standardised for use in basic education. In fact, they are also already being used in postgraduate dissertations and theses.
However, African languages are still not used as media of instruction in most academic programmes.
1.2.3 African languages
African languages are the languages that originated on the African continent.
According to Greenberg (1948:24), there are five families of African languages classified as follows: Semitic, Hamitic, Bantu, Sudanese, and Khoisan. On the other hand, Childs (2003:21) claims that African languages are generally divided into four major groups, which are: Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan, Afro-Asiatic and Khoisan. Both Greenberg (1948) and Childs (2003) agree on the language families, but they give them different names. The following language families have a number of qualities in common, but they are not the same: Hamitic/Semitic and Afro-Asiatic;
Sudanese/Sudanic and Niger-Congo; Bushman/Khoisan and Khoisan; Bantu and Nilo-Saharan families.
7
South Africa has 11 official languages of which nine (9) are African indigenous languages and two are of European origin (Republic of South Africa, 1996). South African indigenous languages are divided into four language groups: the Nguni language group (isiZulu, isiNdebele, siSwati, isiXhosa), the Sotho language group (Sepedi, Setswana and Sesotho), Tshivenda/Xitsonga group, and the English- Afrikaans language group. The latter language group is of Germanic origin. The African languages are part of the Bantu language group belonging to the South eastern zone of the Bantu language family (Doke 1954 in Suzman, 1994:255). The zone consists of three subgroups: the Nguni languages (Zulu, Swazi, Ndebele, Xhosa), the Sotho languages (Northern and Southern Sotho, Tswana), and the Venda/Tsonga group (Suzman, 1994:255). Westphal (1963:239) notes the following about Bantu languages:
Our knowledge of the Bantu languages in general and of the dialects of the established groups permits us to classify the languages of the Southern Bantu Frontier as follows:Nguni Group,Sotho Group,Tsonga Group,Chopi Group, Shona Group, Yei Language, Venda Language, Okavango Group,Ambo Group,Nyaneka Group,Herero Group,Tonga Group, Ikuhane Group.
In South Africa, the 11 official languages are not the only languages in the country.
Other languages include the South African Sign Language, Nama, Khoi and San languages. The Language Policy Framework of the Limpopo Department of Sport, Arts and Culture (LDSAC) recognises six official languages: Afrikaans, English, Sepedi, isiNdebele, Tshivenda and Xitsonga (Limpopo Department of Sport, Arts and Culture 2011:3). The University of Limpopo’s Language Policy (2013) specifies English, Sepedi, Tshivenda and Xitsonga as the university’s official languages (University of Limpopo’s Language Policy 2013). It notes that “English, Sesotho sa Leboa, Xitsonga and Tshivenda shall be used as medium of instruction in academic programmes”. It appears that at the University of Limpopo, the African languages offered on campus (Sepedi, Tshivenda and Xitsonga) are only open for mother-tongue speakers, that is, students for whom these languages are their first language and who are interested in furthering their studies in them. Although IsiSwati is also spoken in Limpopo Province, it is not offered as a language course at the university. Guided by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Republic of South Africa, 1996), the
8
Language Policy of the University of Limpopo (University of Limpopo, 2013) calls for the creation of a multilingual environment at the university.
1.2.4 The creation of multilingualism
South Africa shares with many countries the challenges of inequity (Napier, 2011:61).
Olivier (2011:1) suggests that the term multilingualism refers to the macro sense of the word where the language diversity of the wider learner community, rather than the multilingual capabilities of individuals, is implied. Multilingualism refers to the use and knowledge of two or more languages by the same person (Khanyi, 1999:6). The word
‘bilingual’ is normally used instead of ‘multilingual’ to refer to a person with the ability to speak two or more languages. Strictly speaking bilingual refers to the ability to speak two languages whereas multilingualism is knowing more (than two) languages. Olivier (2011:2) claims that multilingualism is a reality and not necessarily a planned policy executed by a government or other regulatory bodies. Multilingualism is a linguistic capacity that extends across more than two languages (Rhodes University Language Policy, 2014:3). Multilingualism is now supported by the government of South Africa and other regulatory bodies such as UNESCO, the ministerial committee and PanSALB.
One of the operationalisation aims of the University of Limpopo’s Language Policy (2013) is to encourage academic staff to acquire at least one indigenous language of the province in addition to English. The University of Limpopo’s Language Policy (2013:3) further states:
The University shall therefore create an environment and make technological (including simultaneous interpreting and translation) facilities in meetings and gatherings on campus and human power resources available to all staff and students.
According to the Language Policy for Higher Education (2002:5),
the challenge facing higher education is to ensure the simultaneous development of a multilingual environment in which all our languages
9
are developed as academic/scientific languages, while at the same time ensuring that the existing languages of instruction do not serve as a barrier to access and success.
African languages are the mode of communication among Africans. These are the languages that children are socialised in. At a primary level, the children are taught in their mother tongue in the first four years of schooling. After that the medium of instruction becomes English, which continues to dominate until the university level. De Wet (2002:119) points out:
In accordance with the South African constitution and the South African Schools Act, the Department of Education’s Language in Education policy aims to promote multilingualism and the development of the official languages and to pursue the language policy most supportive of general conceptual growth amongst learners.
The Language Policy for Higher Education (2002:13) claims that the ministry is committed to the development and study of South African languages and literature (including the Khoi, Nama, and Sign languages) and would like to encourage institutions to develop and enhance these fields of study. Multilingualism cannot be promoted if the languages are open to the mother-tongue speakers only. In terms of the Ministerial Committee (Republic of South Africa, 2003:23), each higher education institution should be required to identify an indigenous African language of its choice for initial development as a medium of instruction. This means that African languages should not only be used as media of instruction in the African languages modules, but in all other fields of study as well. This will, undoubtedly, go a long way in the promotion of multilingualism.
Madiba (2004: 31) argues that the promotion of multilingualism in higher education is aimed at creating an environment in which all languages work together to promote the values of democracy and social justice enshrined in the constitution. But most schools use a foreign language (English), a language that is not their mother tongue. It is a truism that learning in a language that is not one’s own provides a double set of challenges: not only of learning a new language but also of learning new knowledge
10
contained in that language (UNESCO, 2007). Madiba (2004:31) stresses that multilingualism is a resource for democratisation since it allows the masses better access and participation in the national system. The importance of multilingualism is explained as follows:
The promotion of multilingualism in higher education is aimed not only at helping the students to cope with academic work, but also broadly at transformation, that is, changing the historical identity of the university.
In the South African context, multilingual education relates to the use of more than one language as medium of instruction for teaching and learning (MoIL) in a manner that promotes both academic and linguistic success. (Nkwashu, Madadzhe and Kubayi, 2015:11)
UNESCO (2007) attests that since effective teaching depends on clear and understandable communication, the language of instruction is at the heart of any learning process. And it goes on to add:
For this reason, mother tongue-based instruction is crucial to providing children with early access to education and to enabling them to participate in learning processes according to their evolving capacities.
Ramcharan (2009:3) points out that language skills enhance a learner’s academic performance. One needs to be skilful and knowledgeable in their mother tongue first in order to enhance their academic performance. Mogano (2007:14-15) notes that at the end of the six year projects, learners who are taught in their mother tongue do not only perform better in content subject, but they also outperform those who are taught in English. Pretorius (2013:302/536) argues that the use of South Africa’s official languages must be promoted and pursued. UNESCO (2007:8) claims that multilingual education provides more opportunities for learners to get a good education. Strong multilingual education programmes occur when learners are taught in their mother tongue while learning the official language as a subject. The use and promotion of multilingualism in South Africa needs support. There is a need to develop multilingualism and mother-tongue education.
11
Mogano (2007:10) notes that foreign language usage has been shown to debilitate learning in African classrooms. UNESCO (2007:14) supports bilingual and/or multilingual education at all levels of education as a means of promoting both social and gender equality, and as a key element of linguistically diverse societies. Postma and Postma (2011:2) elaborates that at the heart of the matter lie issues related to the choice of English as a language of learning/teaching (LoLT). UNESCO (2007:4) expresses the view that mother tongue-based programmes enable learners to begin their education in the language they know best. Multilingualism promotes equality and linguistic diversity. Learners are, therefore, more successful in acquiring second language literacy if they have already mastered strategies for negotiating meaning in print in their home language (De Wet, 2002:119). This supports the argument that learners have to learn everything through their mother tongue first before they are introduced to any second language.
However, there are challenges regarding the implementation of the foregoing ideal situation as Madiba, (2004:30) reveals:
In multilingual countries such as South Africa, universities are faced with the challenge of finding practical ways of using multilingualism to promote nation building. The first challenge facing universities in South Africa is the formulation of language policies that entrench multilingualism in institutional discourse.
Sensitivity to multilingualism in the higher education context requires an awareness of the cognitive processes of a foreign or second-language speaker in the learning process (Rhodes University Language Policy, 2014:3). Universities need to establish a relationship with several language boards and units such as the Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB), national language boards, and national lexicography units in order to be able to overcome all language challenges that they may come across. According to the Language Policy for Higher Education (2002:14), the ministry encourages all institutions to consider ways of promoting multilingualism. The ministry for higher education and the higher education board itself support multilingualism and any organisation or institution that is willing to promote multilingualism.
12
Madiba (2004:34) is of the view that universities, as centres of learning and research, should establish creative ways of enhancing multilingualism in their programmes.
Alfaki (2014:46) holds that teachers need to gain knowledge of and access to new curriculum resources and technology tools for the classroom. Madiba (2004:40) argues that a multilingual approach to learning and teaching in South African universities will further create an environment that promotes freedom of thought and speech to produce cadres who are self-motivated and responsible thinkers. It is important to make sure that in higher education, institutions and education in general have all the tools to develop, implement and promote African languages and multilingualism.
1.2.5 The University of Limpopo’s sociolinguistic profile
The University of Limpopo (UL) is located in Mankweng, 30 kilometres east of Polokwane, Limpopo Province, South Africa. Mankweng is a rural area that is dominated by Northern Sotho/Sepedi speakers. The following is a table illustrating the socio-linguistic profile of the university (University of Limpopo Institutional Planning, 2014).
13
Figure 1: The University of Limpopo’s 2012 student profile
Language Number of students Percentage
Northern Sotho 10013 63.4
Xitsonga 2678 17.0
siSwati 967 6.1
Shona 188 1.2
Sesotho 60 0.4
Ndebele 271 1.7
Zulu 227 1.4
Venda 1024 6.5
Setswana 231 1.5
Afrikaans 11 0.1
Other African languages 38 0.2
Xhosa 31 0.2
Other European
languages
2 0.0
Other (un-named
languages)
6 0.0
English 42 0.3
Total of 2012 students 15789 100
According to the University of Limpopo’s 2012 sociolinguistic profile, Northern Sotho with 63.4% is spoken by the majority of the students, Xitsonga with 17.0% is of second majority, Tshivenda with 6.5% came third, then siSwati with 6.1%, and isiNdebele had the most mother-tongue speakers in and around campus with 1.7%. In 2013, the languages with the most mother-tongue speakers are the same as in 2012 except that Tshivenda swapped positions with siSwati, making siSwati number three and Venda number four. The following is a table illustrating the 2013 sociolinguistic profile of the University of Limpopo (University of Limpopo Institutional Planning, 2014).
14
Figure 2: The University of Limpopo’s 2013 student profile
Language Number of students Percentage
Northern Sotho 10268 63.1
Afrikaans 9 0.1
isiXhosa 30 0.2
other (un-mentioned language(s))
6 0.0
English 52 0.3
Xitsonga 2759 17.0
siSwati 1124 6.9
Shona 181 1.1
Sesotho 63 0.4
Ndebele 255 1.6
isiZulu 237 1.5
Tshivenda 1055 6.5
Setswana 201 1.2
1411 (other African languages)
25 0.2
1413 (other European languages)
1 0.0
Total of 2013 students 16266 100
According to figure 1 (the University of Limpopo sociolinguistic profile in 2012), there were 63.4% Northern Sotho speaking students. The second largest language was Xitsonga which had 17.0% followed by Tshivenda with 6.5%. In figure 2, the University of Limpopo’s sociolinguistic profile in 2013 still shows that Northern Sotho was spoken by the majority of the students at 63.1%. It was followed by Xitsonga with 17.0% and Tshivenda with 6.5%. Given this context, however, none of the African languages is used as medium of instruction at the university. These languages have been chosen as official languages, but they are not sufficiently visible on campus. This is a cause for concern.
15
Now moving from the students’ language profiles, the following figure breaks down the University of Limpopo staff language profile (University of Limpopo Institutional Planning, 2014).
16
Figure 3: The sociolinguistic profile of the University of Limpopo academic staff
Language Number Percentage
Northern Sotho 243 38.8
English 140 22.3
Xitsonga 41 6.5
Tshivenda 34 5.4
Afrikaans 32 5.1
Shona 31 4.9
Other (un-named) African languages 24 3.8 Other (un-named) European languages 4 0.6
Other (un-named languages) 10 1.6
Sesotho 23 3.7
Setswana 11 1.8
isiXhosa 10 1.6
isiZulu 9 1.4
siSwati 8 1.3
isiNdebele 7 1.1
Total 627 100
The languages with most speakers within the staff are Northern Sotho, English, Xitsonga, Tshivenda and Afrikaans. Looking at all the figures (Figure 1, 2 and 3), there are three languages that are constant through the three years in terms of number of speakers. These are Northern Sotho, Xitsonga and Tshivenda. On the students’ side, the languages with most speakers are all African languages. But when we look at the staff, two of the students’ most spoken languages siSwati and isiNdebele are replaced by two European languages English and Afrikaans. The staff total in 2013 was 627;
the languages with most speakers was Northern Sotho with a staff population of 243 (38.8%), followed by English with 140 (22.3%) which is questionable because in reality, it seems that there are less speakers of English. Xitsonga has 41 (6.5%), followed by Tshivenda with 34 (5.4%) and then Afrikaans with 32 (5.1%). The three most spoken languages at the university are the three official languages of the university in terms of the language policy of the institution.
17 1.2.6 Language planning
Language planning policy means the institutionalisation of language within a social structure so that language determines who has access to political power and economic resources (Tollefson, 1991:16). Language planning is normally thought of in terms of large-scale, usually national planning, often undertaken by governments and meant to influence, if not change, ways of speaking or literacy practices within a society (Baldauf jr , 2006:147). But language planning as a sphere of inquiry is broader, in that it is also concerned with the process of planning (Cooper, 1989:44). Language planning normally encompasses four aspects: status planning (about society), corpus planning (about language), language in education or acquisition planning (about learning), and, most recently, prestige planning (about image) (Baldauf jr, 2006:147).
Language planning is an attempt to interfere deliberately with a language or one of its varieties (Wardlaugh, 1996:347). Wiley (1996:137) argues that educational language planning can assist in solving some language problems, especially where principles of professional responsibility are used as a guide. Of course, language planning does interfere with the language’s process and use, but this interference is for the better. It interferes with the plan to develop and fix the language problem. Wiley (1996:107) is of the view that language planning is generally seen as entailing the formation and implementation of a policy designed to prescribe, or influence, the language(s) and varieties of language to be used and the purposes for which they will be used.
Whereas Wiley (1996:109) claims that language planning attempts to solve communication or language problems, Ricento and Hornberger (1996:402) are of the view that status planning concerns uses of language, acquisition planning have to do with users of language, and corpus planning deals with language itself. The three (now four) are important and have language in common, which is the sole focus of this study.
To foster democratic participation and agency, local governments should be interested in promoting the use of local African languages for governance, which implies the development of status, corpus, acquisition and prestige planning activities
18
(Chimbutane, 2018: 96). Language standardisation is also part of language planning where a language goes through the process of being officialised or standardised. In this process, the language is first selected (language selection) amongst other languages or dialects. While it may seem like status planning, it is actually corpus planning. Language codification in these sections deals with the morphologies, orthographies and terminologies of language, and these are part of the corpus planning. Language codification is followed by implementation which involves language acquisition. This involves letting people know about the language and learning it. Finally, elaboration and modernisation is a way of promoting the selected language that made it to this step.
Generally speaking, language planning constitutes a deliberate effort to influence the behaviour of others with respect to the functional allocation of their language structure (or function of language varieties), acquisition or codes of the language within a given speech community (Wiertlewska, 2012:117; Cooper, 1989:45; Tollefson 1991:16).
According to Tollefson (1991:16), this effort may involve the creation of orthographies, standardisation and modernisation programmes, or allocation of functions to particular languages within multilingual societies. It may also involve assessing resources, complex decision-making, the assignment of different functions to different languages or varieties of languages in a community, and the commitment of valuable resources (Wardlaugh, 1996:346). Cooper (1989:36) is of the view that Language planning is directed towards aggregates at a level of the society or state, and not only at larger aggregates which cut across national boundaries but also at smaller aggregates – ethnic, religious, occupational, and so on. Communities need to stay firm and stand for their languages. They need to realise that if they are not careful, within 20 years half of this country, if not most of the country, will only be speaking English and African languages will be defeated. Language policies and planning give direction on how languages must be followed and used.
Wiley (1996:106) claims that although language planning frequently attempts to solve conflicts over language, it can also result in creating such conflicts. Language planning affects speakers of regional and social varieties within the language, immigrants who
19
do not speak the standard or majority language, and indigenous conquered and colonised peoples who speak languages other than dominant ones.
(a) Corpus planning
Cooper (1989:31) states that “corpus planning refers to activities such as coining new terms, reforming spelling, and adopting a new script. It refers, in short, to the creation of new forms, the modification of old ones, or the selection from alternative forms in a spoken or written code”. According to Wardlaugh (1996:347), corpus planning seeks to develop a variety of languages or a language, usually to standardise it, that is, to provide it with the means for serving every possible language function in society. Wiley (1996:108) claims that corpus planning “entails efforts to change the body or corpus of a language. Corpus planning may include attempts to define or reform a standard language by changing or introducing forms in spelling, pronunciation, and grammar.”
It may include a new source of vocabulary (vocabulary) and a new orthography planning (development of orthography), which involves the creation and reform of alphabets, syllabaries, ideographic writing systems, dictionaries, and a literature, together with the deliberate cultivation of new uses so that the language may extend its use into areas such as government, education and trade (Wiley, 1996; Wardlaugh, 1996).
Corpus planning has to do with developing language as a system: devising/adapting orthography, coining new terms, adopting loanwords, and establishing the standards of grammatical language use (Grzech, 2013: 296). It is about rewriting, restructuring and developing a language or languages. Languages are always under evaluation so that they can be updated and developed (Cooper, 1989:48). However, there does seem to be a growing awareness that corpus planning does not deal solely with linguistic issues. Wardlaugh (1996:347) claims that corpus planning has been particularly important in countries like Indonesia, Israel, Finland, India, Pakistan and Papua New Guinea. It seems to be happening almost everywhere, making it a global phenomenon. Language development and language standardisation which are central to corpus planning warrant further discussion.
20 Language development
Language is an instrument of communication. We communicate on a daily basis as a means of socialising and, most importantly, as a means of teaching and learning within the university framework. This also indicates that language is an important tool in education and life in general. It is, therefore, of crucial importance that the educational socialisation process occurs in a language known to the people. Ngubane in the National Language Policy Framework (2003: 3) contends that
…a person’s language is in many ways a “second skin”: a natural possession of every normal human being, with which we use to express our hopes and ideals, articulate our thoughts and values, explore our experience and customs, and construct our society and the laws that govern it.
Language plays a key role in the transmission of knowledge; the mother tongue has and still serves as an important foundation in education. Language in general, especially mother tongue, gives a sense of identity and it is an important part of society. According to the UNESCO (2003) position paper quoted in Matentjie ([Sa]:38), it is through language that we function as human beings in an ever-changing world.
Language is a means of expression and an identity; people are mostly identified through language. Language is identified through an expression and sometimes culture.
Language is used to sing, dance, express oneself /communicate and mostly learn. De Vita (2001:165) claims that traditional methods of uniform instruction seem to be ineffective with a student group that is very diverse, with students from different backgrounds and with different approaches to learning. Halliday (1993:93) is of the view that the distinctive characteristic of human learning is that it is a process of making meaning a semiotic process, and the prototypical form of human semiotic activity is language. Hence, the ontogenesis of language is at the same time the ontogenesis of learning. According to Malone (2007:1), the educational problem faced by many children from ethnolinguistic communities is of an immense nature.
21 Language standardisation
Language standardisation is the process by which a vernacular in a community becomes the standard language (SL) form; and this carries implicit elements of prestige (whereby the SL vernacular is valued more highly than others), stability, and common usage (Hall, 2005). Webb and Kembo-Sure (2000:18) hold that language standardisation is the process by which an authoritative body (such as a government- appointed body) prescribes how a language should be written (its orthography), how its sounds should be pronounced, how its words should be spelt, which words are acceptable in a formal situations, and what the appropriate grammatical constructions of the language are. This body, thus, intervenes in the regularisation of the grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and writing system of the language. Normally, the languages chosen or standardised are those of the dominant language groups and/or communities.
Issues of power surrounding language standardisation and standard languages (such as choosing a language spoken by most political figures, kings or by a bigger and richer community) continue to affect the modern world (Hall, 2005). Ouane (1991:1) claims that language standardisation is still to be achieved and remains an ongoing process for underdeveloped countries like Mali, where most of the existing languages do not have a literacy tradition and have only recently obtained access to writing.
Standardising is the process of developing a standard for written and/or oral language.
It occurs in a specific manner, depending on the community and the social, historical and geographic aspects involved (Admilson and de Castro, 2012). This problem area covers primarily the officialisation of languages and their symbolic role in the framework of speech communities viewed as socio-political entities (Garvin, 1993:39).
Officialisation can be defined as the official recognition given to a language by a political unit (such as a state or an autonomous region).
Language and language standardisation is also a topic which opens up a whole array of political, social and cultural issues for learners to examine as a part of, and as a
22
vehicle for, their language learning (Hall, 2005). The issue of standardisation is crucial for more reasons than simply its function as a set of practical guidelines for appropriate public verbal behaviour (Webb and Kembo-Sure, 2000:19). Standardisation is often employed as a “default strategy” to increase the functional value of a language by providing it with a clear linguistic identity (which often replaces a diffuse and highly variable dialect continuum and allows the channelling of language attitudes towards the standard norm), a “modern” lexicon and a supra-regional written norm (Deumert and Vandenbussche, 2003b:464). Webb and Kembo-Sure (2000:19) are of the view that given the politicisation of languages, language norms determine the content of language teaching programmes, can determine career appointments, can act as a basis for discrimination, and can affect the degree to which people are taken seriously in public debate.
The history of standard languages is intricately connected to the activities of individuals and institutions (Deumert and Vandenbussche, 2003b:455). So far, processes of standardisation seem to have benefited the powerful in society, though they are not developed with a linguistic, ideological or state target in mind (Hall, 2005).
Akin (2011:19) contends that “that process usually involves the development of grammars, spelling books, dictionaries, and possibly a literature. In other words, some spoken form of a particular language is written down in an official manner with the intention of making this particular variety the preferred variety.” Hall (2005) is of the view that communities are unified by standard language.
Language standardisation is a process where a language is chosen or selected amongst other languages or a dialect amongst other dialects. There are four stages/model or steps named by Haugen (Haugen 1983; Haugen 1997) that a language or a dialect goes through in order to be standardised: selection, codification, implementation and elaboration/acceptance (cited in Deumert and Vandenbussche 2003b).
23
Deumert and Vandenbussche, 2003a:4) argue that language standardisation always begins with the possibility of choosing or selecting between a number of linguistic alternatives. The selection process is often accompanied by conflicts and debates over what is the “best usage” and, thus, the “best” basis for the new standard variety, Deumert and Vandenbussche, 2003a:5). For example, in the case of England, the vernacular chosen as the vehicle of print capitalism was the language used by the London-based, emergent entrepreneurial and merchant class (Hall, 2005). Webb and Kembo-Sure (2000:19) write that in East Africa, the Kiswahili that was spoken on the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba (and which is called Kiunguja) was selected in 1927 as the standard for the whole region.
Webb and Kembo-Sure (2000:19) state the following about language codification: “the term language codification is also used in conjunction with standardization.
Codification refers to the description of the norms and standards of a language in dictionaries, grammar books, manuals and thesauruses”. However, according to Hall (2005), the selected language then requires codification and elaboration, aiming at a minimal variation and stability in linguistic form (e.g. one spelling for each word).
Deumert and Vandenbussche (2003a:6) note that “codification typically follows the selection process and firmly establishes an explicit and normative linguistic codex through the creation of a range of reference works: grammars, dictionaries, spelling manuals and style guides”. Meanwhile, Hall (2005) argues that elaboration requires the language to perform all the functions of the lower prestige vernaculars.
The socio-political realisation of the decisions made at the stages of selection and codification is referred to as implementation, that is, the gradual diffusion and acceptance of the newly created norm across speakers as well as across functions (Deumert and Vandenbussche, 2003a:7). The key to the overall process of successful language standardisation is acceptance whereby the standardised form can be easily implemented and maintained without challenge from another vernacular (Hall, 2005).
Deumert and Vandenbussche (2003a:7) contend that the implementation stage is the
“Achilles heel” of the standardisation process. Acceptance by the speech community means that they decide on the success or failure of a given set of linguistic decisions
24
made at the stages of selection and codification. Implementation or acceptance has been explained as the result of rational decision making (Deumert, 2002).
Haugen’s model is the popular model of standardisation. The language or dialect selected will have to go through this process in order for it to be official (an official language) or officially standardised. It first has to be selected amongst others, then codified and elaborated, and, lastly, accepted and implemented. If a language is not accepted, it means that there is a need to go back to the drawing board where it is re- codified or a different language is selected and the process begins again. Deumert and Vandenbussche (2003a:7) hold that norm elaboration (or modernisation) refers to those activities aimed at extending the functional reach of the standard variety as well as changes within the existing standard to adapt it to new functions. This involves ongoing terminological, orthographic, grammatical and stylistic development of the codified standard to meet the demands of modern life and technology.
(b) Status planning
Cooper (1989:32) claims that the term status planning refers to the allocation of languages or language varieties to given functions. For example, as a medium of instruction, as an official language, and as a vehicle of mass communication. Wiley (1996:108) explains status planning as follows:
Status planning concerns the relationship between languages rather than changes within them. However, status planning is also concerned with the position of different varieties of a single language. In this case, status planning becomes a function of corpus planning.
Status planning deals with the domains of use, and the standing a language has within a given society (Grzech, 2013:296). Wardlaugh (1996:347) contends that status planning changes the function of a language or a variety of a language and the rights of those who use it. For example, when speakers of a minority language are denied the use of that language in educating their children, their language has no status.
25
Status planning deals with the language itself, not what happens within the language.
The latter falls within the ambit of corpus planning.
According to Zhao and Liu (2010:114), status planning is normally implemented through coercive approaches that are typical of top-down methods. There are several dimensions of status planning. For example, it includes issues such as the designation of language(s) of instruction in schools and the decision regarding whether (and in which languages) bilingual ballots may be used (Wiley, 1996:108). Wardlaugh (1996:347) argues that when a government declares that two languages rather than just one will now be officially recognised in all functions, the newly recognised language has gained status. Cooper (1989:33) states that when planning is directed towards increasing a large language’s uses, this falls within the rubric of status planning and, thus, a third focus (acquisition planning) needs to be added to status planning. The government is the only organisation that has the most power to give or deprive a language of its status. The language given the status is the one that will be used in all spheres of life (including reading, writing and speaking).
(c) Acquisition planning
Acquisition planning is the third category coming after corpus and status planning.
Wiley (1996:130) claims that language in education planning is the primary form of language acquisition planning. Acquisition planning refers to organised efforts to promote the learning of a language (Ndimande-Hlongwaa et al, 2010:348). Cooper (1989:33) notes the value of status planning as follows:
This additional category seems to be useful for at least two reasons.
First, considerable planning is directed towards language spread, i.e.
an increase in the users or the uses of a language or language variety, but not all planning for language spread can be subsumed under the rubric of status planning. Second, the changes in function and form sought by status and corpus planning affect, and are affected by, the number of a language’s users.
26
Language acquisition is about language learning and an increase in the number of language speakers. In modern societies, education provides one of the major means of promoting language acquisition planning and language shift policy (Wiley, 1996:130). Since function, form and acquisition are related to one another, planners of any one should consider the others (Cooper, 1989:33). They should work together or with each one in mind to produce better results.
Wiley (1996:109) makes the following important point about status planning:
“Technically, status planning relates to increasing or restricting the uses of a language but not to increasing the number of its speakers. Language spread can be thought of as promoting the acquisition of a new language or as promoting a variety of a particular language as the standard.” Language planning activities move upwards as well as downwards (Cooper, 1989:38). Status planning is more about decision making, deciding what languages to use and which ones should not be used. It, therefore, focuses on the language itself. Whereas corpus planning is about getting inside the language in order to control how it is being used or how it should be used (mostly in writing and speaking), language acquisition is mostly about language learning.
Corpus and status planning are productive activities; they build up and improve the languages (Zhao and Liu, 2010). Corpus and language acquisition planning focus on teaching and learning the language. They are continuous processes.
(d) Prestige (or image) planning
According to Ager (2005), image is a non-factual version of the semi-factual identity of a society, while prestige is the result of an attitudinal stance towards the semi-factual status of a language within language ecology. Haarmann (1990) in Zhao and Liu (2010:113) argues that prestige planning is a receptive or value function which influences how productive planning activities are acted upon by policy makers and received by the people. In addition, a more detailed analysis of a range of planning examples enables distinctions to be made between image planning as a stage in identity formation and consolidation, and prestige planning as attitudinal change (Ager,
27
2005). Prestige planning is democratic and persuadable as it can only be shaped by long term cultivation (Zhao and Liu 2010:114). Image has to be backed up by reality;
it cannot be fraudulent or it will not work (Gioia and Thomas, 1996:382). Zhao and Liu (2010:114) make a distinction between image and prestige planning thus:
However, image and prestige planning is different from status planning in terms of approach; prestige/image planning requires a bottom-up oriented planning, typically by democratic and persuasive means. For instance, prestige planning points towards attitude change and identity formation through benign and less provocative measures; it emphasizes the effectiveness of participatory models and assigns great importance to collaborative support from the targeted population for which the language products are planned.
Planning to modify status or identity is often regarded as ‘real’ planning, similar to planning for social or economic change, while modifications of prestige or image require emotional manipulation, like commercial marketing (Ager, 2005). Baldauf jr (2004) is of the view that issues of prestige or image have implications with respect to what languages are studied and for the implementation of minority language rights.
Prestige planning aims to influence how the language is perceived both by speakers and non-speakers as well as the respect that is accorded to it (Grzech, 2013:296).
According to Zhao and Liu (2010:113), prestige planning is a receptive or value function which influences how productive planning activities are acted upon by policy makers and received by the people.
1.2.7 Mother tongue education and the medium of instruction
Alexander (2009) cited in Mashiya (2010:95) claims that chances of success are significantly increased for the majority of the learners if the language of learning and teaching (LoLT) is the mother tongue. Mashiya (2010:96) also cites Ogiegbaen’s assertion (2007:100) that the mother tongue provides a more rewarding learning atmosphere at school. The learning experience becomes an extension of home experience, and this guarantees cognitive balance and good performance. Under the
28
language section of an online education portal, Le Cordeur (2014) makes the following argument about mother tongue education:
Mother tongue education at primary school level provides an essential basis for sound education at higher levels. The challenge is for the government to commit more towards engaging parents and gaining their confidence and trust that their children will receive a better education if they are taught – at least at primary school – in a language that they can understand.
Nyika (2015:1) emphasises that learning the official language of instruction such as English in South Africa as a second language is an additional hurdle that can hinder some students, to some extent, from performing well in their university studies.
Multilingualism would not be an issue if English was taught as a subject until higher education. Krishnaji (1990) in Noormohamadi (2008:26) claims that several psychological, social and educational experiments prove that learning through mother tongue is deeper, faster and [more] effective. This proves the importance of mother tongue education; if children are taught in their mother tongue, their knowledge increases. The second language is developed from the first language, that is, the mother tongue.
Alexander (2007:35) states that people should be persuaded to understand that mother-tongue education is the doorway to success, not only in general terms, but also specifically to the learning of English, French, or any other language as a second language. It is easier to learn or acquire things in a second or third language when you have learned them through the mother tongue first. ‘Mother-tongue’, which may also be referred to as ‘primary’ or ‘first language, is a language that a person and/or a family uses to communicate regularly. Mostly, it is a language that the head of the family (the father and or the mother) speaks.
Mashiya (2010:97) claims that learning through a foreign language is a challenge to university students. Bamgbose (2004:12) holds that the importance of teaching African languages as subjects at a tertiary level is that it helps in the process of language
